|
axleblaze posted:So much of it just feels so bluntly and clumsily written. Like the majority of the movie is a character explaining who they are and their motivation while slowly revealing the overall plot or discussing why something just happened. It feels not like an outline of a script than a finished product. There is the seed of a good movie in there and almost everyone commits but so much of the movie is spent with characters jokelessly explaining things. Dogma is just like that dude in college who would say, "I'm spiritual but not religious" with a tinge of smug self-assurance.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I don't know. At its core I think the thing that irks me more and more about Dogma as I get older is that it's kind of the most wishy washy statement on religion you can get. It honestly doesn't even feel very Catholic. It's not really coming from a specific point of view. It's treating religion in a very clinical way. The last time I watched it, I found the central plot point of the film just didn't work for me. The idea is that, Ben Affleck was banished from heaven, and this means that, if he manages to get back into heaven through a loophole, the fact that a loophole exists will disprove the omnipotence of God and this will destroy creation. Somehow. Because of reasons. It feels like a really weird idea that God can't just fix the problem. That Ben Affleck getting back into heaven is actually a disaster and not just some thing God could slap down like "Haha you idiot, I'm God" and instead it will unmake creation and then the whole class will stand up and clap at the silly Christian professor being proved wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
Snak posted:It feels like a really weird idea that God can't just fix the problem. That Ben Affleck getting back into heaven is actually a disaster and not just some thing God could slap down like "Haha you idiot, I'm God" This is exactly what happens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:This is exactly what happens. Right. But it makes the whole plot of the movie up until that point seem silly, because the never explain why Ben Affleck's plan would work. All the characters just act like it will because of reasons, but it doesn't actually make any sense, and then when the ending happens, it's just like "yeah, that plan was dumb and hinged on...???".
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Snak posted:Right. But it makes the whole plot of the movie up until that point seem silly, because the never explain why Ben Affleck's plan would work. All the characters just act like it will because of reasons, but it doesn't actually make any sense, and then when the ending happens, it's just like "yeah, that plan was dumb and hinged on...???". They do explain it though. The movie sets up its own rules and plays fair by them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
And that angel grew up to be Tim Tebow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Yeah, that really isn't something you can hold against the movie because it bases it's rules on catholic Dogma and follows that logic. Like this idea that if God is proven wrong it will destroy the universe isn't something Kevin Smith came up with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:Yeah, that really isn't something you can hold against the movie because it bases it's rules on catholic Dogma and follows that logic. Like this idea that if God is proven wrong it will destroy the universe isn't something Kevin Smith came up with. The fact that the bad guys' plan in the movie is to take advantage of loopholes in Catholic dogma is one of the more clever things about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Snak posted:Right. But it makes the whole plot of the movie up until that point seem silly, because the never explain why Ben Affleck's plan would work. All the characters just act like it will because of reasons, but it doesn't actually make any sense, and then when the ending happens, it's just like "yeah, that plan was dumb and hinged on...???". None of this makes Dogma good, but you're kind of missing the metaphor, which is actually that Ben Affleck looks like a completely normal schlub because he is a completely normal schlub, he's not an angel, he has no magic powers, and what the film depicts is actually a fanatical mass hate shooting (actually, serial fanatical mass hate shooting). Literally the first discussion Ben and Matt have is about how human beings have basically given the game away that they designed God in their image, and that therefore you can use belief to justify any kind of violence no matter how objectively pointless. It's all part of Smith's secular-humanist thesis that 'ideas are better than beliefs,' that the moment you've committed yourself to a devotional struggle against evil rather than a private striving to do good, you already lose the key to the kingdom. This is, however, a false, stupid choice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:Yeah, that really isn't something you can hold against the movie because it bases it's rules on catholic Dogma and follows that logic. Like this idea that if God is proven wrong it will destroy the universe isn't something Kevin Smith came up with. Okay... but I'm not Catholic, so I've literally never heard of this idea. What is the basis for it in Catholicism? edit: Oh man, I tried to google this, but it was just a deluge of "Why Catholics are wrong/going to hell" of "How to disprove god" type stuff. if someone could point me in the actually right direction, I would really appreciate it. Snak fucked around with this message at 04:36 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Snak posted:Okay... but I'm not Catholic, so I've literally never heard of this idea. What is the basis for it in Catholicism? Even if you've never heard of it, they explain it in the movie though. I wasn't raised Catholic and it made sense to me. Like, the "too much exposition" thing I at least kinda get, because they do slow down the movie to explain the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
Kramjacks posted:Kevin Sorbo in, Satan is for Real.  axleblaze posted:How do the people that think all these shootings are false flags designed to take their guns away make sense of the fact that in all these shootings nothing like that has happened at all and in fact gun regulations keep getting looser? Most people are very stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
Snak posted:Okay... but I'm not Catholic, so I've literally never heard of this idea. What is the basis for it in Catholicism? Jesus told Peter "As you shall hold on Earth I shall hold in Heaven," the Catholic Church believes Peter was the first Pope and all other Popes have the same covenant with God, who is Jesus and also not Jesus. Catholics can get weird about rules, the classified an aquatic mammal as a fish so people could eat them on Fridays.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Even if you've never heard of it, they explain it in the movie though. I wasn't raised Catholic and it made sense to me. I mean, I watched the movie, and they said "If god is proven wrong, it will destroy creation" as if that made sense. I didn't think that it did, because God is, you know, God. And then at the end, it turns out I was right, so... I'm not necessarily saying that explaining it more would have made it better. I'm saying that message of the movie feels transparent or weak. Like it's a strawman conflict set up to justify the resolution. But I haven't seen the movie in years, and I'm not clear enough on the details to make a solid argument about it. So I'll just say that, despite having a bunch of clever bits, the central conceit of the movie didn't work me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Look at what a great time those two are having in Hell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
Snak posted:I mean, I watched the movie, and they said "If god is proven wrong, it will destroy creation" as if that made sense. I didn't think that it did, because God is, you know, God. And then at the end, it turns out I was right, so... The premise is, if the bad guys can prove two of God's decrees contradict each other, creation is destroyed. Because God essentially is creation. It's really no different from, say, the dozens of time travel movies that say if you screw up the space time continuum, you'll destroy the universe. Or one of those other sci-fi movies where the good guys trick the sophisticated artificial intelligence into destroying itself by giving it a logic problem it can't solve. And on top of that, like I said, part of the gag in the movie is that it presupposes that Catholics are correct, and has the villains exploiting the logic gaps in Catholicism that every religion has.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
I'm to lazy to look up the specific stuff in Catholic Dogma but just know that many things in many major Religions come from the overthinking of things by the high ups rather than from the actual source. Like at one point a discussion was had about "what if God was wrong" and the answer was "God can't be wrong". Then it was asked "why not?" and the answer was that the Universe is the word of God and if his words can be wrong the Universe can be wrong and therefore if there if God is wrong, the Universe isn't the word and therefore it doesn't exist and then a Pope agreed with that and the Church couldn't go back because the Pope's word is the word of God and as discussed God is never wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:The premise is, if the bad guys can prove two of God's decrees contradict each other, creation is destroyed. Because God essentially is creation. I can accept that, I guess. But for context of my opinion, I also think all those time travel and AI movies using that conceit are dumb too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Snak posted:I can accept that, I guess. Yeah I mean, if you refuse to buy the conceit I guess the movie doesn't work for you. Now I'm just thinking of Dracula: Prince of Darkness, which sets up early on that a vampire can be killed by running water. Does this make a lot of sense? Not really, it seems pretty arbitrary. But they establish it early on and sure enough they play fair by that rule.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Yeah I mean, if you refuse to buy the conceit I guess the movie doesn't work for you. Now I'm just thinking of Dracula: Prince of Darkness, which sets up early on that a vampire can be killed by running water. Does this make a lot of sense? Not really. But they establish it early on and sure enough they play fair by that rule. It's not really the same as "establishing rules and then playing by them", which is a good thing in fiction. What Dogma does is establish that the characters believe a rule without explaining why they believe it, and then it turns out they were wrong to believe it. That's not really the same thing. it also might be the case that I'm trained by hollywood to doubt such character beliefs early on, because in the genre it's common that something will be established early on as an expectation in-universe so that it can be broken during the climax. You know, any time a movie starts out by saying "X is totally impossible. There's no way someone could do that!" it's basically foreshadowing that someone will. Likewise, when it's set up that the villain has a plan which will destroy the world/universe, it's almost always true that they have overlooked the power of love or selflessness or faith or God. So while I'm not saying for sure it's the case, it's possible that I was just predisposed to question what was supposedly a dogmatic belief/truth by the narrative structure in which it was presented.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Snak posted:It's not really the same as "establishing rules and then playing by them", which is a good thing in fiction. What Dogma does is establish that the characters believe a rule without explaining why they believe it, and then it turns out they were wrong to believe it. That's not really the same thing. In what way does it turn out they were wrong? They thwart the bad guys' plan. It's a case of "that would've worked if you hadn't stopped me."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
I love poo poo where Vampires or whatever are so much more powerful than normal humans that they can kill you without even blinking, but poo poo like spilling seeds or getting to the other side of a bridge can save you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Running water isn't a totally arbitrary weakness for vampires, is it? I thought that was a folklore thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
I think they can't cross running water in some lore. Not sure about it killing them but yeah vampire poo poo is all over the map
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:Running water isn't a totally arbitrary weakness for vampires, is it? I thought that was a folklore thing. It is. Folklore, like religion, is often arbitrary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
It kinda makes sense, water is a cleansing/purifying thing. Running water is cleaner than stagnant etc...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
I once played a game that was one player as Dracula vs 5 players as vampire hunters, and I was Dracula. The hunters pressured me into retreating onto a boat and then just staked out every port I had access to with tons of priests and weapons until I died at sea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:It kinda makes sense, water is a cleansing/purifying thing. Running water is cleaner than stagnant etc... Yeah the way they do it in Dracula: Prince of Darkness has some gravity and religious symbolism to it but then by Dracula: A.D. 1975 they're just throwing vampires in bathtubs and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Snak posted:It's not really the same as "establishing rules and then playing by them", which is a good thing in fiction. What Dogma does is establish that the characters believe a rule without explaining why they believe it, and then it turns out they were wrong to believe it. That's not really the same thing. They weren't wrong to believe it: Before God can intervene to prevent Ben from entering the cathedral, he has to be liberated when Bethany pulls the life support on the homeless man. The point is that the totality of existence was jeopardized by dogmatism. There is no mystery to Dogma. It makes totally practical, consistent, accessible sense. That's the problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Snak posted:That Ben Affleck getting back into heaven is actually a disaster and not just some thing God could slap down like "Haha you idiot, I'm God" Uncle Boogeyman posted:This is exactly what happens. Uncle Boogeyman posted:In what way does it turn out they were wrong? They thwart the bad guys' plan. It's a case of "that would've worked if you hadn't stopped me." But like I said, it's been years since I saw it, so maybe I'm forgetting the details of the ending. I was literally going of your statement that "This is exactly what happens" in reference to what I said about God just stopping the plan. edit: ^ God being trapped in a person's body is the thing I was forgetting about. Yes, it makes a lot more sense now. Funny that God could be "trapped" like that though... so yes, I now remember the whole plan. I think. Snak fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
I like Dogma because a human asks God what it's all about, and God flicks their nose and makes a childlike noise, then tries (and fails) to do a headstand. It's my second favorite depiction of God. The first is from Good Omens, where God is described as a dude who, no matter what anyone is doing, just grins like a motherfucker.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
Could god microwave a burrito so hot he couldn't eat it
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Could god microwave a burrito so hot he couldn't eat it It would still be cold in the middle so no
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
I Before E posted:It would still be cold in the middle so no I've never understood this. How are people loving up microwaving poo poo so regularly that the inside remains cold? Keep the turntable on, flip it every 30 seconds, and anything'll be warmed throughout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 08:05
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:So sometime in the next week I have an interview with a decent job working customer service for a medical devices company that specializes in less-invasive cardiology tech. Last year I had a life-saving heart surgery that, thanks to the advancement of the instrumentation, did not require me to have a valve replacement or be on blood thinners for life. Do you think it's appropriate to mention that at the interview, should it come up, or would that be overly-personal/raise (unjustified) questions about my health? Definitely raise it, no question. You are demonstrating that you have benefitted from similar tech and really appreciate the difference it can make, so you would be likely to be more motivated as you buy into what they are doing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:Coming this summer, Tim Allen in... The Satan Clause. Blood on Santa's Clause
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Could god microwave a burrito so hot he couldn't eat it Yes. And then he could still eat it. God works in mysterious ways.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 10:02
|
|
|
yo I swear I just spotted Steven Seagal in the opening scene of Reservoir Dogs...  
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 12:34
|
|
|
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rEIS7Nd2qg
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Who is gonna see Free State of Jones? Probably gonna see that and wait on Independence Day. I wanna see Confederates murdered in increasingly inventive ways
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 13:15
|
|